Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/13/2012 OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER July 13, 2012 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council FROM: Alan Tandy, City Manager AT SUBJECT: General Information Unfortunate News  As the successor agency for the former redevelopment agency, the City (and all others statewide) received the enclosed message from the Department of Finance this week, stating “This email serves as notice that Finance is no longer accepting revised ROPS or requests to reconsider denied items nor making any revisions to existing requests. Requests to reconsider denied or disputed ROPS items will be addressed in our January through June 2013 ROPS review.” Translation for us - we have $8 million in valid debt which has been improperly denied by the Department of Finance and now they will not even consider our appeal or look at the details which would contradict their previous decision. Apparently the State is feeling empowered - with fairness, due process and equity seemingly secondary to the quest to take money from successor agencies. They say we can submit these items for review at a later time - no doubt with a follow up letter of blanket denial and refusal to consider the merits or weigh the facts. Additionally, the County Auditor Controller is being instructed to interpret the law in a manner that does not authorize them to release enough money to pay us the amount for the ROPS items which were approved by the Oversight Board and the Department of Finance. The County Auditor says we should amend the ROPS - on the same day of that advice by the County, the State Department of Finance came out with the ruling that they will not accept amended ROPS. This overall situation is going from bad to worse. I will spare the great deal of editorial comment that comes to mind as it seems unnecessary! Good News • Residential building permits for the month of June totaled 104, a 333 percent increase over the number of permits issued in June 2011. Looking at the calendar year through June, compared to this same time period last year, the number of residential permits issued has increased by 231 percent! • Bakersfield will play host to a large sports event this weekend as PONY baseball return to our city. PONY stands for “Protecting Our Nation’s Youth.” Between July 12 and July General Information July 13, 2012 Page 2 16, the PONY Baseball Tournament will bring 40 teams to Bakersfield. This tournament normally brings spectators from the leagues that the teams are representing because it is one step away from the PONY World Series. We are expecting between 2,000 and 3,000 in attendance. • The Board of Supervisors will consider an outline for an animal sheltering alternative next Tuesday. The outline we sent to them for consideration is enclosed. • Crews will be resurfacing certain City tennis courts beginning this week through September. The attached schedule from the Recreation and Parks Department provides approximate dates and locations for the resurfacing activities. • The hearing on the draft EIR for the Kern River Restoration Project took place this week with a good turnout of citizens providing comments. On a separate, but related note, the formal comment period for the 24th Street project closes Monday. • The State of the City event took place this week in front of a capacity crowd. Thanks to the Chamber for providing us the opportunity to share all the activities occurring in the City! • Enclosed is a memo from the Human Resources Division highlighting the High Five Award recipients for the first and second quarters of 2012. The recipients were honored by fellow staff, supervisors or members of the public for their exceptional work and/or customer service. Congratulations are due to each award recipient! High Speed Rail News  New information publicized this week shows the High Speed Rail Authority may have prematurely dismissed developing a working relationship with SNCF – a foreign-based high speed rail development company with a track record of building successful, profitable high speed rail systems. The enclosed article outlines the history of SNCF’s interest in the project and the Authority’s reluctance to consider SNCF’s concepts and ideas for a high speed rail system in California. One of SNCF’s foremost concepts was a route that followed Interstate 5, with smaller commuter legs running from nearby cities in the Central Valley.  An editorial in the New York Post this week harshly criticizes the State legislature for its recent approval of the funding to start building the high speed rail project. Quite frankly, the author states, the project is “a ripoff, no matter what the cost.” The editorial is enclosed, it is worth a read. General Information July 13, 2012 Page 3 Event Information  Demi Lovato with Hot Chelle Rae July 15th at 7 p.m. Rabobank Arena Tickets: $29.50 – $69.50  An Evening With Yanni July 17th at 7:30 p.m. Rabobank Theater Tickets: $45-$150  Willie Nelson July 20th at 8 p.m. Bright House Networks Amphitheatre Tickets: $25-$75  Movies in the Park: “Puss in Boots" at Siemon Park July 20th at dusk Siemon Park, 3300 Redlands Dr Free Council Referrals  Councilmember Johnson o New Family Planning Facility Concerns  Councilmember Sullivan o Signals at District Boulevard, White Lane, Ashe and Harris Roads Reports For your information, we enclose the following information:  The Streets Division work schedule for the week of July 16, 2012. AT:rs:ch cc: Department Heads Roberta Gafford, City Clerk DRAFT Deal Points for an Interim Agreement Between the City of Bakersfield and County of Kern Regarding Animal Sheltering Services • TERM: 12 months (July 1, 2012 – June 30, 2013)  City and County need to identify By April 1, 2013 if a long-term agreement is desirable and achievable.  This new agreement to provide for both the land lease and operational terms through June 30, 2013. • ANNUAL COMPENSATION: $740,000 • SHORT TERM Mt. VERNON IMPROVEMENTS: Acknowledging the current condition of the Mt. Vernon shelter, the City will allocate $100,000 for immediate short-term improvements that are designed to improve the care provided to resident animals as well as improve the public’s interaction at the facility. These improvements will include items already identified by the City such as:  Landscaping improvements  Façade improvements  The addition of shade structures in several areas  Misc. painting  Kennel improvements  Fencing improvements (motorized fence in unloading area)  New housing area for feral cats This allocation should be matched by a firm County commitment for additional short-term improvements. • FRONT END PROGRAMS: (These efforts will be accomplished within the City’s approved budget during the next year). Investments in front end field activities to promote the licensing and vaccination of animals as well as other methods of promoting responsible pet ownership is vital to reducing the amount of animals taken in by the shelter. To further this goal, the City is prepared to work on the following activities (note the items below are not exhaustive, instead they are illustrative of the type of activities the City is willing to participate in. Other options may be developed in addition to these items).  Expand the City’s canvassing efforts to promote licensing and vaccination of dogs in the City. This may include increasing the number of canvassing teams assigned to this activity as well as implementing other ideas to bolster this effort. DRAFT  The City has already approved increasing its field staff by adding two additional City Animal Control Officers.  Identification and promotion of low cost spay/neuter programs/options. A new low cost spay/neuter facility is scheduled to open in the fall. Promoting this local low-cost option will help inform pet owners and help make this new local option a success.  Participate in and support special adoption events with the County.  Partner with the County in staffing and promoting Rabies Vaccination and Licensing Clinics. Look to add a low-cost micro chipping option as part of a low-cost all inclusive package for pet owners. • RESEARCH/FUTURE PLANNING: In order to work towards a joint new vision for animal care and sheltering for Metropolitan Bakersfield, the next 12 months must be used as an opportunity for the City and County to come together to adequately evaluate and research opportunities to improve upon the current animal shelter model. This work should include the following:  Establish a City/County planning task force to study and evaluate potential options related to a shared vision of animal sheltering. This task force may occur at two different levels; 1.) A joint City/County working group comprised of appropriate staff from both agencies to conduct research and evaluate other shelter models that may provide improved options if implemented locally; 2.) A joint City/County Animal Control Committee comprised of several elected officials from both the City and County. If implemented, this body may serve in a roll of evaluating current shelter/Animal Control functions and provide a forum for the public to voice their concerns, ideas and recommendations. This body may then make recommendations to both the City Council and Board of Supervisors on this topic.  Review shelter designs and options for retrofitting and or building new facilities at the Mt. Vernon location. Review and evaluate alternative locations if the Mt. Vernon location does not provide cost effective options.  Develop an equitable allocation of costs formula between the City and County for any long-term operational agreement. Sun Mon Tue Wed Thurs Fri Sat CENTENNIAL CENTENNIAL CENTENNIAL 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 CENTENNIAL CENTENNIAL OFF OFF OFF 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 OFF OFF OFF CAMPUS CAMPUS 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CAMPUS CAMPUS CAMPUS HAGGIN OAKS HAGGIN OAKS 29 30 31 1 2 3 4 HAGGIN OAKS HAGGIN OAKS HAGGIN OAKS SILVER CREEK SILVER CREEK 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 SILVER CREEK SILVER CREEK SILVER CREEK SEIMON SEIMON 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 SEIMON SEIMON SEIMON JASTRO JASTRO 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JASTRO JASTRO JASTRO JASTRO JASTRO 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 JASTRO JASTRO 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 SE P T AU G U S T JU L Y advertisement latimes.com/news/local/la-me-rail-advice-20120709,0,4539140.story The French railway recommended that the state build the rail line along the Interstate 5 corridor and partner with it or another foreign firm to hold down costs. By Dan Weikel and Ralph Vartabedian, Los Angeles Times July 9, 2012 As state officials accelerated their effort to design a high-speed rail system in 2010, they were approached by the renowned French national railway with a suggestion: The project could use the help of an experienced bullet train operator. Until the end of last year, SNCF, the developer of one of the world's most successful high-speed rail systems, proposed that the state use competitive bidding to partner with it or another foreign operator rather than rely on construction engineers to design a sophisticated network for 200-mph trains. The approach, the French company said, would help the California High-Speed Rail Authority identify a profitable route, hold down building costs, develop realistic ridership forecasts and attract private investors — a requirement of a $9-billion bond measure approved by voters in 2008. But SNCF couldn't get its ideas — including considering a more direct north-south route along the Central Valley's Interstate 5 corridor — out of the station. Instead, the rail authority continued to concentrate planning in the hands of Parsons Brinckerhoff, a giant New York City-based engineering and construction management firm. Although they have occasionally consulted with high-speed railways, officials decided that hiring an experienced operator and seeking private investors would have to wait until after the $68-billion system was partially built. Last week, the state Senate approved — by a single vote — $8 billion to get construction underway. "It's like California is trying to design and build a Boeing 747 instead of going out and buying one," said Dan McNamara, a civil engineer who worked for SNCF's U.S. affiliate. "There are lots of questions about the Parsons Brinckerhoff plan. The capital costs are way too high, and the route has been politically gerrymandered." High-speed rail officials rebuffed proposal from French railway - latimes.comhttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-rail-advice-20120709,0,61179... 1 of 4 7/12/2012 8:34 AM Under the authority's management, cost and ridership estimates have fluctuated wildly. The project's ability to lure private investors remains uncertain, the route through the eastern Central Valley has ignited a legal war with the agricultural industry and some experienced operators, such as the Central Japan Railway Co., have lost interest in the project. The Japanese firm, which runs the famous Shinkansen bullet train, turned its attention elsewhere when the authority decided to save money by sharing track in major urban areas with freight and passenger trains. Dan Richard, chairman of the rail authority board, declined to answer specific questions about SNCF's proposal or critiques of the project. In a statement, however, he dismissed the railway's ideas. "Our business plan is predicated on having private operations after the initial system is built," Richard said. "Turning the design of the system over to a private operator would have been a bad financial move for California taxpayers. SNCF's proposal was self-serving and not in the public interest." Will Kempton, chief executive of the Orange County Transportation Authority and chairman of the rail authority's peer review panel, said, however, that he was impressed with SNCF's ideas. "It would make sense to get the operators involved early in the process, so the operator can have input in the construction and design," Kempton said. SNCF built and operates the Train a Grande Vitesse system, or TGV, with 1,100 miles of track handling 800 high-speed trains a day. It carried about 114.5 million passengers in 2010 and has made an operating profit annually. When the French firm showed interest in developing California's system, the eastern Central Valley route had largely been set, decided in 1995 long before the full cost of construction was understood. Political experts say the route was pushed by politicians from the eastern Central Valley who were instrumental in initiating and funding the project and were later backed by then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Bypassing Fresno, the state's fifth-largest city, would have been a deal-killer, the experts said. "If you went up the I-5, you'd get a lot of votes from the cows in Coalinga," said Richard Katz, a member of the L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Authority board and a former high-speed rail authority board member. SNCF officials said that if they were hired they would propose running the bullet train along Interstate 5 through the Central Valley and then linking to San Francisco. McNamara said the I-5 route would have been the shortest, fastest and lowest-cost alignment, with a price tag of about $38 billion — sharply less than the rail authority's current route, which has been estimated at various times to cost $34 billion, $43 billion, $98 billion and now $68 billion. According to SNCF, the I-5 route could use state-owned right of way or utility easements, reducing conflicts with property owners. The railway's initial analysis indicated that the I-5 route might also be 20 minutes faster. By law, the bullet train must make the L.A. to Bay Area trip in less than 2 hours, 40 minutes, though internal authority High-speed rail officials rebuffed proposal from French railway - latimes.comhttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-rail-advice-20120709,0,61179... 2 of 4 7/12/2012 8:34 AM documents raise serious questions about whether the current route can meet that mandate. In the French view, fast service between the state's mega-regions would provide most of the riders and lead to the system's ultimate success. The French contended that rail service to Fresno, Bakersfield and Palmdale could be accomplished with branch lines linked to the I-5 route and regional commuter service, such as Metrolink. Instead, the high-speed rail alignment goes through Gilroy, Fresno, Bakersfield and Palmdale, which accounts for much of the project's 190 miles of viaducts and 48 miles of tunnels. State officials say the present route has more ridership potential and fewer construction complications than an I-5 path, though they concede it would be slower and cost more. From 2010 to November 2011, SNCF officials briefed California legislators and transportation agencies. They met with rail authority board members and two chief executives, Mehdi Morshed and Roelof Van Ark, both of whom have since left. The company's message was blunt. "Simply put, the California High-Speed Rail Authority has a wish list, not a plan," an SNCF presentation stated. "This lack of an investment-grade business plan is a deadly defect, particularly in a project that by law cannot rely on government subsidies for its operation and maintenance." According to the railway's proposal, an experienced operator would be hired to help with initial planning. If a decision was made to proceed further, the operator would be retained to help with final design and construction with the intent of eventually running the system — an idea that was well received by some California officials. "The longer we wait to have private-sector involvement, the less we can transfer the risk," said state Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), who heads a special committee that oversees the bullet train project. Private operators "are not going to accept the risk if [state officials] decide everything. That's why I was intrigued by their proposals early on." Though he urged Van Ark to listen to the French, Lowenthal said the chief executive rejected SNCF's ideas. "He is a technocrat," Lowenthal said. "I don't think he understood that we were accepting all the risk. He was just there to build it." Van Ark could not be reached for comment. Julien de Hornay, the former president of SNCF America Inc., said he never knew why Van Ark turned down the company's proposals. SNCF no longer wants a role in the project, its enthusiasm extinguished as the proposal became increasingly controversial, opposition mounted in the Central Valley and company officials learned that the political establishment would not be flexible on the alignment. "The French are not interested right now because of what they have seen," McNamara said. "They don't think it is a feasible project the way it is currently designed." dan.weikel@latimes.com High-speed rail officials rebuffed proposal from French railway - latimes.comhttp://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-rail-advice-20120709,0,61179... 3 of 4 7/12/2012 8:34 AM By BEN BOYCHUK Last Updated: 12:44 AM, July 11, 2012 Posted: 10:21 PM, July 10, 2012 California is broke and broken. Its freeways and roads are crumbling. Many cities — like Stockton, which declared bankruptcy two weeks ago — are straining under hundreds of millions in bond debt and unfunded pensions for retired public workers. In the face of a slow-motion fiscal train wreck, why would state lawmakers commit to spending $5.8 billion in state and federal funds on the first phase of a high-speed rail line that practically nobody wants in part of the state where practically nobody lives? The state Senate on Friday narrowly approved legislation to start work on a 130-mile stretch of rail between Madera and Bakersfield, where a tiny fraction of Californians live and work — mostly on farms. OK, a few folks want the Golden State’s high-speed train to nowhere: Urban planners, public-employee unions, the beleaguered construction industry and sundry green utopians with a hopeless case of China envy love the concept. And Gov. Jerry Brown is a big fan, stubbornly standing by the plan even as he cut spending on welfare, education, parks and prisons. Yet the best explanation may be the Obama administration’s desperation for a win. The US Department of Transportation thrust $3.5 billion in stimulus money into the state’s grubby hands (billions that Florida and Ohio wisely turned down) and said “build it.” But the feds then told California to break ground on the project this year — or lose the cash. Never mind that Golden State taxpayers can’t afford the longterm costs of running a high-speed-rail system, or that voters have soured on the project. Yes, Californians in 2008 approved $9.95 billion in bonds to finance what was sold as a $40 billion train from Anaheim (home of Disneyland) to San Francisco (a different kind of Fantasyland), with trips starting in 2020. But the state’s proposal turned out to be mostly fantasy, too. Almost every estimate — cost, ridership, speed, construction time — turned out to be wildly off, incomplete or too incredible to be believed. How incredible? At one point, state officials giddily promised 117 million people a year would ride the bullet train from LA to Frisco. Sorry: In a good year, just 30 million people ride Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor, the nation’s busiest rail line. California officials eventually revised their estimates to 44 million passengers, still half again what Amtrak carries in 46 states. And still ignoring the fact that Californians are (famously) wed to their cars. The cost has been controversial from the start. The $40 billion price tag in 2008 quickly ballooned to $80 billion, then $98 billion, and eventually $120 billion. A revised “business plan” released this year supposedly brought the price down to $68 billion, with the first trains expected to leave the station in 2035. It’s a ripoff, no matter what the cost. A few weeks ago, Brown signed a $92 billion budget deal to close a $16 billion deficit. But for the budget to “balance,” voters must approve a massive $8.5 billion tax hike in November. Without that cash, Brown says he’ll need to cut $6 billion from public education. But by approving this $5.8 billion downpayment on a boondoggle that’s on track to top a hundred billion, Brown and his fellow Democrats in Sacramento have given away the game, and imperiled their hopes for higher taxes. A Field Poll released two days before the state Senate’s vote found that one in three likely voters — including one in five who support Brown’s tax scheme — said they’d probably vote against higher taxes if lawmakers funded the bullet train. Well, the people’s representatives made their decision. Now the people have a chance to respond in kind in November — and slam the brakes on this fiscal crazy train. Southern Californian Ben Boychuk is an associate editor of the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal and contributor to PublicSectorInc.org. NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc. NYPOST.COM , NYPOSTONLINE.COM , and NEWYORKPOST.COM are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc. Copyright 2011 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved. Privacy | Terms of Use Updated: Wed., Jul. 11, 2012, 12:44 AM California’s insane bullet train—Ben Boychuk - NYPOST.comhttp://www.nypost.com/f/print/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/california_... 1 of 1 7/12/2012 8:23 AM Week of July 16_2012_Work Schedule Page 1 of 2 STREETS DIVISION – WORK SCHEDULE Week of July 16, 2012 – July 20, 2012 Resurfacing/Reconstructing streets in the following areas: Reconstructing streets in the area south of White Ln and west of Pin Oak Park Reconstructing McNair Ln, Ride St and Cernan Way (grinding & pulverizing will be done at night) Grind & Resurface Ming Ave between Wible Rd & New Stine waiting on Utility to lower their manholes (most of work will be done at night) Sealing streets in the area between “H” St & Union Ave south of Wilson Rd Resurfacing streets with oilsand in the Oleander area (blade seal) Resurfacing streets with oilsand in the area between Niles & Flower east of Miller St (blade seal) Miscellaneous Streets Division projects: Video inspection of City owned Sewer & Storm lines to evaluate condition of pipes (CDBG funded area) Installing & Repairing curb, gutter & sidewalks in the area east of Oleander & south of Palm St. (CDBG funded area) Installing & Repairing curb, gutter & sidewalks in the area south of California Ave to 8th St from “M” St to “N” St Storm line installed on “A” St between 17th St & Truxtun Ave. Storm line connection at Henry Ln & Rosedale Concrete repairs in the area Manley Ct & Angela Way preparation for street reconstruction NOTE: If raining, there will be no street sweeping service and all street cleaning personnel will be assigned to cleaning plugged drains and part circle culverts. This also applies when a large number of street sweeper are in Fleet for repairs which is the current case. Areas that have been missed during this time will be swept at the end of the month. THIS SPACE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Week of July 16_2012_Work Schedule Page 2 of 2 STREETS SWEEPING SCHEDULE Monday, July 16, 2012 City areas between 99 Hwy. & Stine Rd. – Panama Ln. & Taft Hwy. Tuesday, July 17, 2012 Between Panama Lane & Woodmere Dr. – Ashe Rd. & Stine Rd. Between District Blvd. & Panama Ln. -- Gosford Rd. & Ashe Rd. Between Akers Rd. & Phyllis St. – Harris Rd. & Panama Ln. City areas between Akers Rd. & Stine Rd. – Harris Rd. & Panama Ln. Cul-De-Sacs on the north side of Angela Wy., between Manely Ct. & Cris Ct. Between Oswell Park Dr. & Brundage Ln. – Oswell St. & Leeta St. Wednesday, July 18, 2012 City areas between Workman St. & Sterling Rd. – 58 Hwy. & Baja Dr. Between Morning Dr. & Park Dr. – College Ave. & Willis Ave. Between Buena Vista Rd. & Old River Rd. – White Ln. & Panama Ln. Between Old River Rd. & Gosford Rd. – White Ln. & Pacheco Rd. Thursday, July 19, 2012 City areas between Stockdale Hwy. & Ming Ave. – Ashe Rd. & Gosford Rd. Between El Portal/Laurelglen Blvd. & Ashe Rd. – Ming Ave. & So. Halfmoon/Olympia Dr. Between Ashe Rd. & Stine Rd. – Ming Ave. & So. Halfmoon/Edgemount Dr. Between Coffee Rd. & Wilson Rd. (ext.) – White Ln. & So. Halfmoon/Olympia Dr. Friday, July 20, 2012 Between Stockdale Hwy. & Ming Ave. – Allen Rd. & Old River Rd. Between Old River Rd. & Coffee Rd. – Ming Ave. & Ridge Oak/Westwold Dr. Between Ridge Oak/Westwold Dr. & White Ln. – Old River Rd., east to the PG&E easement. Between White Ln. & Asperata Dr. – Gosford Rd,, west to the PG&E easement. Between White Ln. & Cederwood Dr. – Stine Rd. & Wilson Rd. (ext.)